On 05.09.2004 17:12, james woodyatt wrote:
> I want to be able to extend the functions so that my build system knows
> how to use more toolchains than just C and Ocaml, and I want those
> extensions to be bundled with my non-GPL code. If I were to use Omake,
> then I expect my code would link to the functions in the Omake
> distribution, and I would then be in violation of the GPL if I didn't
> use a GPL-compatible license for my distribution.
There is no "linking" involved when you use the built-in rules of omake.
The way it looks is that in your own OMakeroot file you will have
something like:
#
# Include the standard configuration
#
include $(STDROOT)
(although I do not really know what would be considered "linking" in a
case of an interpreted language).
As I mentioned in an earlier post, the "built-in" support of C, OCaml,
LaTeX, etc is not some built-in magic - there is just a "global" omake
file that is included in the distribution that defines a number of
default rules, using the same syntax that you would use in your own
OMakefile.
The situation is identical to having a big make file with a lot of
useful rules and you just adding
include /usr/local/lib/make/UsefulMakeFile
to the Makefile in your project. Doing something like that would in no
way require modifying make itself in any way.
I would guess there would be nothing wrong with using a liberal license
(BSD or like) on this "global omake file", in order to allow users to
borrow pieces of it and freely modify them as needed, while the main
omake engine would still stay GPL... Do people feel that a license
change of this sort would be helpful?
--
Aleksey Nogin
Home Page: http://nogin.org/
E-Mail: nogin@cs.caltech.edu (office), aleksey@nogin.org (personal)
Office: Jorgensen 70, tel: (626) 395-2907
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners